This charity is a huge membership org with substantial funds, it should be directed in its processes and function by its members, represented by the voted for trustees and president. In reality and in practice the paid management/employees of the charity consider that it is they who are the managers and are in charge of all processes. The paid managers consider the trustees to be a dummy committee and a front, necessary only to keep charity status.
The membership has lost all influence and control over what is the primary professional body and registration system of qualified professionals. Meaning that people with no knowledge of or qualification in the area of expertise are now guiding the direction and policy of the whole profession. This is contrary to the aims of the charity.
Issues
- Numerous reports and detailed complaints regarding financial wrongdoing and poor governance over many years. The Commission have continually chosen not to act
- If the chair of trustees, a position voted in for a set period of office, by the members of a membership charity never serves their full term Then, taking into account the concerns and issues the Commission are already aware of, questions should surely be asked
- When the voted for and consecutive and different chairs are regularly accused of wrongdoing and bullying when attempting to fulfil their legal obligations this should raise concerns.
- These are serious incidents and should have been reported to the Commission
- The CEO and the financial director have been investigated for significant financial fraud and have been removed from office.
- This has been reported to the Commission, the Commission have not opened a stat inquiry.
- On taking up his position with the charity the most recent chair elect discovered significant compliance issues He communicated immediately and regularly with the Commission who were advising him on how to affect change (before his being removed from his position by the charity)
- As a result of following that regulatory advice and attempting to do as the Commission requested the president was accused of bullying and wrongdoing and removed by the trustee board.
- As the president is now no longer the president the Commission refuses to discuss charity issues with him as they consider it an internal matter.
18
Conclusion
Charity Sanity believes registered charities must comply with charity regulations and it has been clear over many years that this charity does not do this, it is also clear the Commission have been aware of this.
We consider that adherence to charity regulation and law is not a matter of choice for charities, but an absolute must. That if charities do not follow and obey charity regulation and law then this non compliance should be acted upon swiftly and decisively by the Commission.
Charity Sanity believes that non-compliance with regulations and law by charities is a serious offence that requires a serious response. This does not involve hand holding and gentle persuasion.
We consider that if whistleblowers directly following Commission guidance and instruction are adversely treated or affected because of following that regulatory guidance and instruction the Commission should intervene.
As a result of the Commissions continued inaction and refusal to act this membership charity is now being run by its unvoted for employees and is being run as a business, this is contrary to charity law and as such it should not be registered as a charity.
The constitutions of membership charities ensure that the direction, management and control of the charity is driven by its members. In this organisation, due to the protracted inaction by the Commission, the membership and the trustee board have lost any ability to influence and have any input into THEIR organisation
